Talk:Seven (1995 film)/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Lankyant (talk · contribs) 19:13, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

I will conduct this review. Lankyant (talk) 19:13, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a. (prose, spelling, and grammar):

   1a. The prose is clear and concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; the spelling and grammar are correct.

Plot

• Change 'Somerset fails to get himself and Mills reassigned to another case, believing it is too extreme for his last investigation.' I find this sentence a bit janky. Maybe 'Somerset, believing the case is too extreme for his last investigation, tries to get himself and Mills reassigned but fails.'?
  • Reworded it but possibly still iffy, would like a 2O. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 21:31, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
• Link pederast to Pederasty
  •  Done. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 21:31, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
• 'the ubiquity of and apathy toward sin.' add commas to 'the ubiquity of, and apathy toward, sin.'
  •  Done. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 21:31, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Cast

• 'Doe's victims include: Bob Mack appears as Gluttony' remove the 'appears'
  •  Done along with a few other instances in the same sentence. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 21:31, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Development

• Change 'helm' to 'lead'
  •  Done. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 21:31, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
• 'which tasked him with' to 'which saw him'
  •  Done. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 21:31, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Style and set design

• 'film within the confined of the sets,' should be 'confines'
  •  Done DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 15:44, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
• link 'wrangler' to Wrangler (profession)
  •  Done DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 15:44, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

Critical reassement

• ' "I know a lot of people hate Seven and think it's just garbage, so it's good to be humbled in that way. I'm really proud of it ... Looking back at the time that's passed, I feel extremely lucky that they never managed to make a sequel to it ... I've been lucky that they've not managed to make a prequel to it, which, in my opinion, sucks all of the kind of meaning and energy out of who and what John Doe represents. I love that it's still a standalone piece' Speech marks need to be added at the end to close the quote
  •  Done DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 15:44, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

1. b. (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   1b. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.

• Remove '(stylized as Se7en)' from the lead, I would remove it as it goes against the MOS Guideline MOS:TMRULES, here's a reproduction of the relevant section:

"Avoid using special characters that are not pronounced, are included purely for decoration, or simply substitute for English words or letters (e.g., "♥" used for "love", "!" used for "i") or for normal punctuation, unless a significant majority of reliable sources that are independent of the subject consistently include the special character in the subject's name. Similarly, avoid special stylization, such as superscripting or boldface, in an attempt to emulate a trademark. (See also Wikipedia:Article titles § Special characters.)

• use: Macy's, Skate, Yellow Tail, Seven, Alien 3, Toys "R" Us
• avoid: macy^★s, skate., [ yellow tail ], Se7en, Alien³, Toys Я Us"

As Se7en is included in the example I think it should be removed.

My understanding of TMRULES is for the primary usage, not a note including the stylisation. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 21:31, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

You're correct under Indicating stylizations, my bad Lankyant (talk) 21:34, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

• Accolades section, could we include a table/list of its accolades as well as the prose? How come you deleted the table? Happy to proceed without but would like to know your thoughts.

1. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a. (reference section):

• Reference section looks good and detailed

1. b. (citations to reliable sources):

• Sources all look good and appropriate. Spot check of 10 of them all check out. No dead links.

1. c. (OR):

• Points are all backed up by citations.
• I would add reference 11 to the end of the sentence 'Set decorator, Cat Mueller, portrayed the lust victim after Fincher's assistant said she had the personality and body to portray a "dead hooker." She received $500 for six hours of filming over two days, but described being nude in front of Pitt as a perk.' under casting.
  •  Done + removed commas. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 15:44, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
• Last sentence of Title credits doesn't need reference 61 at the end as it doesn't mention the 'disquieting' or barks or screams or the 50,000 cost so is redundant there.
  •  Done. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 15:44, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

1. d. (copyvio and plagiarism):

• Copyright vio's are all quotes so all good.

2. It is broad in its coverage.

   a. (major aspects):

• Good

1. b. (focused):

All good

2. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

• All good

1. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

• All good

1. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a. (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):

   b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):

• In casting, the picture of Kevin Spacey next to the zodiac picture is confusing as I would expect it to be that Spacey was cast based on similarities to Zodiac. I would split them. Spacey standalone, and I would put Zodiac and a photo of Ned Beatty together.
  • Replaced with Beatty. I considered removing Spacey's photo entirely as there are quite a few images but I think it's a useful context for the article, so moved it off to the right. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 21:31, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

  Yea I much prefer it that way and I agree the Spacey photo is still useful. Lankyant (talk) 21:36, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

1. Overall:

   Pass/fail:

(Criteria marked are unassessed)

• I've also uncapitalised the sins, as I don't see why they should be considered proper nouns. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 21:31, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

  Cheers, yea I was going to mention this but was pondering it some more. Was wondering if they are used as character names maybe... but probably better to just uncapitalise Lankyant (talk) 21:33, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

• I'm happy for this article to go to GA. It's a great read and very informative and I'd say well on its way to being Featured. Thanks for the work! Lankyant (talk) 19:58, 29 March 2023 (UTC)